1) National Geographic: Six Degrees Could Change the World (2008), Ron Bowman 2) What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The narrative of the film describes how the condition of our planet would change if the overall global temperature raised 6 degrees Fahrenheit. It goes through each degree, one by one, until the ultimate tipping point of 6 degrees is reached. Not only does it discuss the natural condition of the planet, but the social and economical implications as well. Energy consumption, unsustainable consumer habits, and other factors have accelerated the warming of the planet. 3) What sustainability problems does the film draw out? The film mostly focuses on the demand for fossil fuels and unsustainable energy practices. Because fossil fuels is not a renewable energy source, an alternative energy source must be found to not only meet our increasing demands, but help revert the environment back to a sustainable condition. The film mentions a positive-feedback cycle where decreasing natural habitat will accelerate global warming which will kill off more natural habitat and so on. 4) What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
I was very persuaded by the Australian fires. Although many of the other students in the class thought the fires were overblown and computer generated, I have seen firsthand what it is like to experience a similar situation. Being from southern California, I have had to evacuate my house many times due to the brush fires which sweep across the land. 5) What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why? I was not compelled by the immense size of the problems. It seems that any one individual has almost no power or place in a world affected by problems of such magnitude. Although I love helping the environment, I was extremely humbled and discouraged by the film 6) What audiences does the film best address? Why?
The best audience for this film would be an uneducated audience (in terms of environmental problems). This is because it is visually stimulating and does not overburden the viewer with mass amounts of confusing scientific data. The computer animations and other effects help provide a possible glimpse into the future; for many who are unaware of the planets condition, can help open their eyes. 7) What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
If a little more scientific data was presented, even more educated viewers would be convinced by the film. Although I do not think the purpose of the film was to convince more environmentally experienced viewers, it would definitely enhance the film overall and if even one or two extra people were compelled by the extra data, then it would all be worth it. 8) What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
The film suggests actions as small as changing lightbulbs and inspecting your house for efficiency, all the way up to increasing power plant efficiency and an overall decrease in energy consumption. 9) What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?
Because the film suggests more efficient energy methods, I was compelled to seek out the leading ideas in this area. The two of which I came across were solar powered power plants, which harness the sun’s energy, and nuclear fusion, which occurs when two atomic nuclei fuse together to form a heavier nucleus. This releases a massive amount of energy, however it has not been perfected yet and no reactor is expected to be implemented into the power grid before 2050. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_power
2) What is the central argument or narrative of the film?
The narrative of the film describes how the condition of our planet would change if the overall global temperature raised 6 degrees Fahrenheit. It goes through each degree, one by one, until the ultimate tipping point of 6 degrees is reached. Not only does it discuss the natural condition of the planet, but the social and economical implications as well. Energy consumption, unsustainable consumer habits, and other factors have accelerated the warming of the planet.
3) What sustainability problems does the film draw out?
The film mostly focuses on the demand for fossil fuels and unsustainable energy practices. Because fossil fuels is not a renewable energy source, an alternative energy source must be found to not only meet our increasing demands, but help revert the environment back to a sustainable condition. The film mentions a positive-feedback cycle where decreasing natural habitat will accelerate global warming which will kill off more natural habitat and so on.
4) What parts of the film did you find most persuasive and compelling? Why?
I was very persuaded by the Australian fires. Although many of the other students in the class thought the fires were overblown and computer generated, I have seen firsthand what it is like to experience a similar situation. Being from southern California, I have had to evacuate my house many times due to the brush fires which sweep across the land.
5) What parts of the film were you not compelled or convinced by? Why?
I was not compelled by the immense size of the problems. It seems that any one individual has almost no power or place in a world affected by problems of such magnitude. Although I love helping the environment, I was extremely humbled and discouraged by the film
6) What audiences does the film best address? Why?
The best audience for this film would be an uneducated audience (in terms of environmental problems). This is because it is visually stimulating and does not overburden the viewer with mass amounts of confusing scientific data. The computer animations and other effects help provide a possible glimpse into the future; for many who are unaware of the planets condition, can help open their eyes.
7) What could have been added to this film to enhance its environmental educational value?
If a little more scientific data was presented, even more educated viewers would be convinced by the film. Although I do not think the purpose of the film was to convince more environmentally experienced viewers, it would definitely enhance the film overall and if even one or two extra people were compelled by the extra data, then it would all be worth it.
8) What kinds of action and points of intervention are suggested by the film? If the film itself does not suggest corrective action, describe actions that you can imagine being effective.
The film suggests actions as small as changing lightbulbs and inspecting your house for efficiency, all the way up to increasing power plant efficiency and an overall decrease in energy consumption.
9) What additional information has this film compelled you to seek out?
Because the film suggests more efficient energy methods, I was compelled to seek out the leading ideas in this area. The two of which I came across were solar powered power plants, which harness the sun’s energy, and nuclear fusion, which occurs when two atomic nuclei fuse together to form a heavier nucleus. This releases a massive amount of energy, however it has not been perfected yet and no reactor is expected to be implemented into the power grid before 2050.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fusion_power
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solar_energy